Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
V.NARASINGH
Bao Viet Insurance Corporaton – Appellant
Versus
MV World Virtue – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court fees payment confirmation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. reliefs sought in admiralty suit. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. arguments on prima facie case. (Para 8) |
| 4. court's view on maintaining suit and cause of action. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. final order for vessel arrest and subsequent actions. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
ORDER :
V. NARASINGH, J.
I.A No.35 of 2025
1. This is an application for payment of court fees.
2. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff submits that in the meanwhile deficit court fees of Rs.23,150/- has already been paid. Memo filed to the said effect is taken on record.
3. In view of the same, no further order need be passed in this I.A seeking extension of time to file the deficit court fees.
4. I.A is accordingly disposed of.
5. Registry is called upon to number the ADMLS.
6. This Court is informed that the present ADMLS shall be numbered as ADMLS No.7 of 2025.
02. ADMLS No.7 of 2025 and I.A Nos.34 & 36 of 2025
1. This matter was mentioned yesterday by the learned counsel for the Plaintiff, Mr. Biswal. At the time of mentioning, it was submitted at the Bar that there is a caveat. Therefore, learned counsel for the Plaintiff was asked to serve a copy of the petitio
The court upheld the arrest of a vessel due to a prima facie maritime claim regarding cargo shortfall, emphasizing the necessity to protect the Plaintiff's rights without immediate security requireme....
An action in rem against a vessel can coexist with arbitration proceedings, and the arrest of the vessel is permissible despite the invocation of arbitration.
The court confirmed that maritime claims under the Admiralty Act, 2017 allow arresting a vessel for dues irrespective of ownership, emphasizing the ship's distinct legal personality.
A breach of contract in maritime agreements may support claims for damages and penalties under the Admiralty Act 2017, classifying such disputes as maritime claims.
The court held that a plaintiff designated as a 'U.S. Persons' under U.S. Sanctions Laws cannot invoke admiralty jurisdiction for arresting a vessel as security for arbitration, rendering the arrest ....
The court affirmed that a breach of contract under the Admiralty Act justifies a maritime claim, requiring the defendant to furnish security for damages due to failure in contractual obligations.
A claim for refund of detention charges does not fall within admiralty jurisdiction if it is not connected to a maritime claim involving a vessel.
The court established that the arrest of a vessel under the Admiralty Act requires strict adherence to the conditions set forth in Section 5, and failure to meet these conditions renders the arrest o....
An action in rem under admiralty law can proceed despite an arbitration clause, as such actions are intended for obtaining security for maritime claims.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
